HD Monitor Causes DRM Issues with Netflix

Jeremiah Cornelius points us to Davis Freeberg's blog, where he discusses his "nightmare scenario" of losing access to his DRM-protected purchases by upgrading his PC monitor. "When I called them they confirmed my worst fears. In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft's DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM. This means that I would lose all the movies that I've purchased from Amazon's Unbox, just to troubleshoot the issue. Because my computer allows me to send an unrestricted HDTV feed to my monitor, Hollywood has decided to revoke my ability to stream 480 resolution video files from Netflix. In order to fix my problem, Netflix recommended that I downgrade to a lower res VGA setup."

Comments

vista only

[Anonymous Coward]

Tag this Vista only. I ain't got no problems like that with XP.

Re:vista only

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Hi. I posted this story. The guy is not lying. You should try this yourself, with HDMI sometime.

When he's done being Slashdotted, look at the screen captures of his dialogue boxes.

I watched this technology being demonstrated - as an insider during development. Sheer suckage.

Re:vista only

[el americano]

Bad COPP No Netflix
Posted on January 3rd, 2008 by Davis

Movie Viewer Message

When In Doubt Blame Microsoft

Even though I'm an HDTV fanatic, it wasn't until this past weekend, that I finally made the jump to an HD monitor. While I don't have HDTV tuners on my Media Center, I do have an HD camcorder and it was important for me to be able to edit my high resolution videos.

After doing a little bit of research, I decided to pick up a SyncMasterTM 226BW from Samsung. Between the new monitor and my ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT video card, the resolution looks absolutely stunning. Even my home movies look fantastic in HDTV. I really couldn't have been happier with the upgrade.

Unfortunately, Hollywood isn't quite as thrilled about my new HD Media Dream Machine and they've decided to punish me by revoking my Watch Now privileges from Netflix.

I first found out about the problem on New Year's Eve, when I went to log into my account. When I tried to launch a streaming movie, I was greeted with an error message asking me to "reset" my DRM. Luckily, Netflix's help page on the topic included a link to a DRM reset utility, but when I went to install the program, I stopped dead in my tracks when I saw this warning.

Netflix Reset Microsoft DRM Utility

Netflix DRM

The minute I saw"this will potentially remove playback licenses from your computer, including those from companies other than Netflix or Microsoft" I knew better than to hit continue. Before nuking my entire digital library, I decided to call Netflix's technical support, to see if I could get to the bottom of my C00D11B1 error message.

When I called them they confirmed my worst fears. In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft's DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM. This means that I would lose all the movies that I've purchased from Amazon's Unbox, just to troubleshoot the issue.

Technically, there is a way to back up the licenses before doing a DRM reset, but it's a pretty complex process, even by my standards. When I asked Netflix for more details, they referred me to Amazon for assistance.

Perhaps even worse than having to choose between having access to Netflix or giving up my Unbox movies was the realization that my real problems were actually tied to the shiny new monitor that I've already grown fond of.

Netflix's software allows them to look at the video card, cables and the monitor that you are using and when they checked mine out, it was apparently a little too high def to pass their DRM filters.

Because my computer allows me to send an unrestricted HDTV feed to my monitor, Hollywood has decided to revoke my ability to stream 480 resolution video files from Netflix. In order to fix my problem, Netflix recommended that I downgrade to a lower res VGA setup.

As part of their agreement with Hollywood, Netflix uses a program called COPP (Certified Output Protection Protocal). COPP is made by Microsoft and the protocol restricts how you are able to transfer digital files off of your PC. When I ran COPP to identify the error on my machine, it gave me an ominous warning that "the exclusive semaphere is owned by another process."

My Netflix technician told me that he had never heard of this particular error and thought that it was unique to my setup. When I consulted Microsoft, they suggested that I consult the creator of the program. Since Microsoft wrote the COPP software, I wasn't sure who to turn to after that.

The irony in all of this, is that the DRM that Hollywood is so much in love with, is really only harming their paying customers. When you do a DRM reset, it's not your pirated files that get revoked, it's the ones that you already paid for that are at risk. I

Re:vista only

[cjsm]

And this is the problem with most DRM schemes. They do nothing to solve the real problems of pirated media, and instead put all kinds of shackles on the people who actually pay good money for their music, movies, and software; in the process making pirated media superior to bought media.

Re:vista only

[man_of_mr_e]

Well, I was unable to read the original story because of slashdotting. The story seems to be "real", in that things likely happened as he explains, but he's (probably not deliberately, though definately hyperbolically) misrepresenting many of the facts.

First, nothing "scans all your files". Second, he makes it sound like you aren't allowed to watch videos without DRM, which is not correct. Third, it's not terribly difficult to backup your licenses. It's 3 clicks in Windows Media.

What this boils down to is when the DRM is "reset", the signing code is regenerated, which means that any files that use DRM that were downloaded with the old signing code will no longer play, because the signing key is no longer valid. Nothing "scanned all the files", nor were licenses "revoked". If they were revoked, you couldn't back them up and restore them with the new signing key.

Basically, it's the same thing that happens if you wipe your hard disk and re-install iTunes. None of your iTunes music downloads will work, because it regenerated a new signing key.

Now, this is still a problem that adding a higher resolution monitor causes the DRM to no longer function without resetting, but it's not an insurmountable problem, and it's almost *NOTHING* like what the author is trying to portray the situation as.

Re:vista only

[BosstonesOwn]

This is a reason why piracy is becoming such a problem.

Not only is it cheaper to download it off the net some where (pick your favorite source) the people who rip the content rip out the drm which makes it just easier to use. No worries about licenses , no worries about 2 services destroying each other, no worries about changing hardware and having to repurchase half your library because one service uses it and the other doesn't.

These companies just don't realize that drm is draconian. Multi Os platforms and easy to use video content that will play any where is what the future should hold. instead they try ad put a strangle hold on the content and tell us we can only use it on windows , and maybe if your lucky a mac. Basically telling me what OS and what hardware I should run by placing system requirements on the content , meanwhile on a Linux or Solaris box, I don't need anywhere near those resources to watch a downloaded movie.

Draconian restrictions were also used at the fall of the roman empire. I think we (the US) is really shooting ourselves in the foot with these restrictions.

And Yes I have seen these errors on my wifes Vista computer. God how I'd love to strip out vista and install ubuntu or fedora for her. Im tired of cleaning out windows systems !

Re:vista only

[guruevi]

Correction: Your iTunes music will keep working (if you off course backed them up). If they're DRM-protected, all you need is an internet connection to re-authorize your computer and de-authorize the previous setup. Maybe it's different with the combination of Amazon and Netflix because the DRM is different although I don't ever plan on buying DRM'ed stuff so I wouldn't know. My guess is that the DRM-scheme authorizes a single key which resides on the client and (another guess) that copies can not be played anywhere else. The implementation is stupid because it is basically a PKI between buyer and seller where the buyer is the sole owner of their private key, Apple's implementation has all "keys" server-side and sends them to your player which is linked to a specific account so you can re-authorize your media.

Re:vista only

[jaa101]

You say "Third, it's not terribly difficult to backup your licenses. It's 3 clicks in Windows Media."

I can't see anywhere where he states what version of Windows Media Player he's using but, given his setup, it's reasonable to assume it's pretty recent. Are you aware that, with Windows Media Player11 and according to Microsoft, `This version of the Player does not permit you to back up your media usage rights.'

So with WMP11, once you lose your licence data or upgrade enough hardware, you need to go around and contact every vendor you bought DRM files from and ask nicely if they'll re-license your content. Ask yourself what your chances are of being able to play your DRMed files in five or ten years.

Re:vista only

[networkBoy]

Ironic 'taint it matey?

Honestly though, there is little to no competition to a fully "pirate" setup.
* XBMC on old Xbox with component video cables (720p max, but that's what my LCD is :-)
* LAMP media server, exports *everything* on simple usr/pwd shares
* movies transcoded from my library
* MP3's transcoded from my library
* BBC shows and other public broadcasting shows I like

No real reason I couldn't add an RSS feed to TPB and autograb shows other than WGHB and BBC stuff (or movies etc.)
According to the **AA my copies of my music/movies are not proper and thus "pirate" etc. and it blows absolutely every other option I've tried out of the water. In theory I could add a myth back-end server and capture off the air/cable with a DVB card or a hauppage + cable box setup, but honestly there is no need.

XBMC is even better than myth in my opinion, and both of them kick the pants off of XP-MCE.
-nB

Re:vista only

[mac.man25]

This can all be solved by a little device called HDFury. It sits between your display and your DRM enabled device and converts from nasty DRM laden, to beautiful, DRM free signals. Completely digitally. (Unless you get the VGA model)

My friend got one for his PS3. Works great, he uses his PS3 with a CRT monitor, full 1080p BluRay with no issues. Pretty wicked little device.

Re:vista only

[arivanov]

This should not be called DRM.

This should be called illegal restraint of trade and monopoly abuse.

It should be also dealt with accordingly.

Re:vista only

[erroneus]

To some degree you're right. But in some ways, you've got it backward.

DRM has managed to make "pirates" out of people. Sharing music through various means has been a part of human culture since the dawn of time. We sing to each other, play for each other, perform for each other. By natural extension, we loaned or copied sheet music to to each other, we loaned or copied player piano tracks to each other, we loaned or copied records and tapes to each other, and now more recently, we share and copy MP3s to each other.

The industry has taken a human social behavior and have criminalized it for their own profits adding "force of law" to their business model.

This stuff has gotten out of hand long ago and it is taking far too long to set things straight. The best answer is to restore copyright durations to their original time frame. There's no need to extend it to over 100 years as we seem to have it now. In fact, under present law, there is very high risk of losing the public domain entirely as well as losing access to artistic works in the future! Consider the issues we have seen with document formats and the push to get them into open standard formats. The purpose? To avoid having important and public information being lost due to the format no longer being supported while remaining secret. Right now, we're collecting our music in digital formats that are locked away by both technology and law where neither accounts for an "end" of the duration of copyright. It accounts for nothing about what happens when the works are no longer covered under copyright. The works are lost!

Re:vista only

[Shakrai]

Draconian restrictions were also used at the fall of the roman empire. I think we (the US) is really shooting ourselves in the foot with these restrictions.

Yes, the fall of the Roman Empire can be traced directly to restrictive DRM schemes imposed by the media of the day ;) So restrictive were they that it was often easier to just pirate the town criers announcements by listening to friends repeat what he had to say then trying to listen to him directly.

Sorry for the sarcasm, I largely agree with what you had to say up until this. It might have been better to say that corruption played a part in the downfall of Rome -- corruption triggered by people with financial interests to protect. That actually sounds kind of familiar.... :(

And Yes I have seen these errors on my wifes Vista computer. God how I'd love to strip out vista and install ubuntu or fedora for her. Im tired of cleaning out windows systems !

What's stopping you? Ironically enough my girlfriend (the artist) is less locked into Windows then I am (the IT person). She needs a PC to be able to surf the web (Firefox), do document production for her graduate courses (Open Office) and read e-mail (any number of free clients). She didn't even notice when I switched her to Firefox and isn't really locked into anything that requires Windows.

I'm screwed, because I need MS Abscess^WAccess for work and the ability to join my PC to our Active Directory. Even on a personal level I'm more locked in then she is, because I'm into gaming and keep all of my finances in Quicken.

Re:vista only

[TheCarp]

yup...and all I can say is... GOOD

I really hope this happens to lots and lots of people. I really hope just fuckloads of people lose access to what they paid for. If I believed in any gods, I would pray to them for this.

I hope it causes such a stink, that the US congress has to step in and hold hearings. I hope this becomes such a public relations nightmare that DRM dissapears so thoroughly that it becomes nothing more than a footnote in books on the histories of bad ideas.

I can think fo nothing better than seeing the conspirators who put together this crap being drug out before congressional panels and skewered for their antisocial machinations.

-Steve

Owned

[CJ145]

Yet another reason to pirate all the content you want.

Re:Owned

[bigtangringo]

AnyDVD + Handbrake + VideoLAN

"We work hard, so you don't have to"

Re:Owned

[packeteer]

How would that help? They wouldn't even troubleshoot on a system like Linux. He could have refused their scan and kept his freedom.

In my opinion it is your own fault if you purchase DRM content. You don't HAVE to have their content. I know you really want to because its big Hollywood movies but what is difficult to understand. Your making a choice to retain your freedom or your use of Hollywood entertainment. If you know before hand that you could be screwed over while not doing anything wrong as well as not being able to go after the content provider because they did nothing outside of their agreement who's fault is it? It's surely not theirs. You decided to play their game and to pay them for the privilege. You get burned and cry to slashdot. It's very sad that there is good content that is going to be locked in DRM away but thats just bait for suckers.

Re:Owned

[MMC Monster]

Agree.

(Unfortunately) More people should get burnt by these DRM schemes so that people will ask twice before signing up for them. As knowledgeable as we (the /. community) is, we have to get the word out to friends and family when they ask for our recommendations. It doesn't take much. When they ask about bluray or HD-DVD, just mention off the cuff the dueling standards. If they talk about downloadable content, ask them what happens when you change computers or if the service closes down. Mention that the Walmart service (backed by a company bigger than Microsoft) is closing down and the mess it leaves the customers.

We are the people with the (purchasing) power. We have the power to get rid of DRM. We just have to use it wisely.

Re:Owned

[filbranden]

It's often like the industry is trying to sabotage itself.

And as much as they try it, they still can't do it effectively!

I find it amazing that people don't boycott this stuff more. I mean, buying DRM content is really stupid.

On the other hand, sometimes boycotting bad products is almost impossible. Until some time ago, it was impossible to buy a notebook without Windows bundled in it. That meant that if you wanted to boycott Microsoft you would have to give up on your notebook. It took several years, but the market is changing and now it's possible to buy notebooks with other OS or no OS even from major vendors.

DRM content, on the other hand, is easier to boycott. You really can live without it. And in some cases, it seems that the boycott is being effective.

Re:Owned

[rho]

It probably isn't even that cheap.

It's a free add-in to their service. For every buck per month you spend you get an hour of streaming. It may not be cheap, but since their standard mail service is already worth the money I spend, the Watch Now is a pleasant bonus.

It probably isn't even superior to their snal-mail variant and possibly not even much better in terms of delivery speed.

It would be better if the library were more robust, but the speed is fine. It starts in a few seconds.

Anything Netflix is offering over the web I can also stream around the house if I want to.

I don't know what you mean here, but it reminds me of the folks who say "I can just torrent whatever I want." Maybe, but I'm not interested in maintaining multiple gigabytes of video files, and torrents are hideously slow for things that are not widely popular. Netflix trades "free" for excellent service and breadth of offerings. It's like a massive hard drive with high latency. Since movies arrive in a timely fashion I'm rarely waiting for stuff, and on the off chance I want something now now now, and assuming it's offered on Watch Now, that option is available.

I dunno, maybe it's just because I have no vested interest in screwing the MPAA or whatever. The few bucks I give to Netflix every month is more than repaid in the service they provide without any streaming.

Re:Owned

[rmerry72]

Anything Netflix is offering over the web I can also stream around the house if I want to.

I don't know what you mean here, but it reminds me of the folks who say "I can just torrent whatever I want."

Don't confuse streaming over the Internet and torrenting with streaming through a local network to another TV. He is saying "I can view it anywhere I want" not "I can get anything I want". Big difference.

He wants to view all of his content - even his legally obtained DRM content - anywhere in his house. Its exactly like expecting to place a TV or radio anywhere in the house and being allowed to watch and listen to the same channels. What if Channel 7 only let you watch Channel 7 on Sony branded TVs? What if you couldn't watch Channel 7 on a Sony TV if you had a Hitachi TV in the same house?

Re:Owned

[Jester998]

AnyDVD is commercial software for Windows that decrypts + rips DVDs. There is also an 'HD' version out now that supports HDDVD and BluRay. It can be used to rip commercial DVDs to a DVD-R disc with region-free playback, or simply to an ISO on your hard drive. (http://www.slysoft.com/en/anydvdhd.html)

Handbrake is an open-source DVD-to-MPEG4 converter. (http://handbrake.fr/)

VideoLAN is a media player that can play back the MPEG4 files created with Handbrake. In addition to local plaback, it has the ability to unicast/multicast video & audio across a network. (http://www.videolan.org)

So basically, the idea is, rip the video to make it DRM-free, convert it to a smaller, more efficient format for storage, stream across a network.

Re:Owned

[Martin Blank]

Consoles are inferior, IMHO, for FPS and RTS compared to mouse and keyboard, and there are still games that are released solely for Windows PCs.

Cancelling

[Lulfas]

Looks like I'll be cancelling my Netflix account for awhile then. Once again, it proves that companies make it easier to just pirate stuff than it is to try and legally pay for it.

Re:Cancelling

[Thomas M Hughes]

In this instance, it's not really Netflix's fault. Netflix has repeatedly said that they want to make their steaming feature available to more operating systems, browsers and the like. The reason they haven't is because the MPAA studios which supply the movies that Netflix's rents won't license them movies unless they use some form of DRM that they approve of. And they only approve of Microsoft's DRM, which means the only options open for Netflix are Microsoft supplied DRM movies or nothing at all.

If you want proof of this, there are videos of Netflix having a working demo of their streaming tech on OS X from back in March, but they still haven't released it for the main site, since they still haven't gotten approval on the DRM from the sudios.

If you're going to protest, your protests should be directed at the MPAA. That may involve a boycott of Netflix as well, but it definitely shouldn't stop there, nor should Netflix be the primary focus.

Re:Cancelling

[Ophion]

Netflix has repeatedly said that they want to make their steaming feature available to more operating systems, browsers and the like.

Great Freudian slip!

Alternative to DRM

[maxrate]

If distributors could invisibly/digitally watermark the video that gets legally downloaded with a user-id/serial number-that could make people think twice about distributing the video freely to others/thereby potentially eliminating the need for DRM. The video would be traceable to the original consumer. I guess it's possible a video file could be 'leaked' accidentally and it could cause a lot of trouble for the consumer/distributor. My guess is that anyone who is willing to pay for a download would likely NOT participate in redistributing the file - but I'm too naive and too much of an optimist at times maybe!

I buy sheet music online - the site only allows you to print to a physical printer NOT a PDF recorder (it also prints my full name on the sheet music). I'm sure there is someone who is smart enough out there to bypass this, I've thought about it (for the technical challenge) but really I'm probably just to lazy to even try.

Re:Alternative to DRM

[roca]

That doesn't work because watermarks are incredibly easy to get around. Simple signal processing techniques will eliminate most watermarks without noticeably affecting the output. In many cases you can just add your own watermark over the top and either destroy the existing watermark or no-one knows which one is the original watermark.

Pretty much all watermarking research assumes that an attacker does not know how the watermarking technique works and does not intelligently attack the watermark. That assumption is hopelessly unrealistic. It's 100% security by obscurity.

DRM display lockout

[Paul_Hindt]

This was one of those "features" of Vista that I heard about in the earlier days of the hype. There wasn't a clearly defined explanation of how they would indeed tie DRM to your HD monitor but I guess the results are starting to show. Someday maybe all of our hardware will be locked down so that if you don't buy content with appropriate DRM, it simply won't play. Hurray for freedom!

Re:DRM display lockout

[MightyMartian]

Finally I don't agree with any of this DRM crap at all. I think it's all bullshit and will never purchase any DRM'd video files, ever. But I don't like untrue FUD being tossed around even if it is against a MS product. Hell, it's not like the content providers will ever let their crap play on an OS without the ability to use this kind of DRM - what was MS supposed to do, not support the DRM and not even give consumers the option of watching DRM'd files? That's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater (even if in this case the baby is a seriously ugly SOB that few - but some - would want)

Yes they should have said stuff it to the studios. Microsoft controls over 90% of the desktops on the planet. For once they could have used their monopoly position to some good.

DRM sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

This perhaps doesn't directly address the problem mentioned, but this is what I do. I only bother with Netflix DRM because I get it "free" anyway with my subscription.

Anyway, using a script I wrote, I parse the HTML saved from Firefox (pretending to be IE7) and download the highest bandwidth version of a movie. I then cringe and for the only time each month boot Windows and using Mirakagi, FreeUse4Win, WMP and unDRM the file. Then I can play in perpetuity in Linux/MythTV.

The size of the files is normally 1-2GB. Yes, that's less than DVD quality, but pretty acceptable in most cases. You can fetch the keys for 9 hours of movies per month (for the basic subscription), but they round up, so if you do it carefully and get keys for 8.5 hours of movies, you can make the last one a 3 hour epic - about 5-7 movies total.

This is all based upon information I got from here: http://forum.rorta.net/showthread.php?t=1134&page=6 (link to last page)

Kaffeine didn't play the resulting WMVs very well. mplayer and VLC do a better job.

What do you mean YOUR eyes and ears?

[StefanJ]

Read the F'ing EULA my friend.

And if you don't stop fast-forwarding through those Axe commercials we're going to deactivate your reproductive module.

Re:There are sample videos in the "My Videos" fold

[clem]

The fact that you can download mp3s from amazon.com is probably due to the fact that computer speakers have become such a low-end commodity that vendors can't convince anyone to "upgrade" to DRM-enabled models.

mfilemon

[DamnStupidElf]

mfilemon is a printer port driver for Windows 2000/XP (maybe Vista and 2003, ymmv), so the Windows Printer thinks it's an Applescript or generic HP laser printer but it actually just dumps postscript files in a directory of your choosing. You can probably rig up any number of other scenarios where a "real" printer just sends postscript output to a network port somewhere that you can capture, or just turn on print-to-file with a normal printer, depending on how smart the DRM on the application is.

Re:I call bullshit...

[croddy]

Oh, I wish I'd copied the text while it was still mysterious red. Anyway, he provides screenshots, model numbers, and so forth. There's a "DRM reset" tool that Netflix recommended that they say will nuke anything from other vendors. It's clear that his digital restrictions keystore became corrupted somehow, and Netflix, Amazon, and Microsoft all directed him to each other. In the end he wonders why he bothered paying at all, noting that he could obtain higher-resolution rips for less money using bittorrent.

webserver?

[commodoresloat]

Looks like the webserver had some non-netflix content on it and its DRM got revoked.

Re:Hmmm. What is the problem here?

[gEvil (beta)]

Okay, I won't buy from Netflix, especially since they don't "sell" digital downloads. What they do offer is an online-viewing service that's included "free" (currently) with their standard by-mail service. A service which, I might add, happens to work beautifully if you're running XP. It looks like this guy's problems stem from the fact that he's running Vista and has decided to change his hardware (even if it is only the monitor). We were given plenty of warning that Vista would do this, so we shouldn't be surprised when it happens.

Re:There are sample videos in the "My Videos" fold

[harrkev]

The fact that you can download mp3s from amazon.com is probably due to the fact that computer speakers have become such a low-end commodity that vendors can't convince anyone to "upgrade" to DRM-enabled models.

Wanna bet? When I build my "dream" computer 3-1/2 years ago, I got an Audigy 2 sound card. It appears that the digital audio outputs are disabled if you are trying to play some restricted hi-def audio files (not MP3, though). So, if you went high-end and run your computer to an amp with digital inputs, you simply cannot listen to some music. The sad thing is that the people most likely to care about hi-def audio are the ones most likely to switch to an all-digital setup. Yet another reason to stick to analog speakers.

Lots of Netflix haters... but why hate Netflix?

[SuperKendall]

I don't see why all the antipathy against Netflix exists - it's not even Netflix that is distributing the files he would lose, just that the streaming player will not work because of a corruption in the DRM database.

Blame Windows for not having a better handle on backing up that data, sure. Blame UnBox for selling such crippled media - OK then. But Netflix has no other choices because content providers will not accept other solutions. They aren't even storing anything locally, just streaming.

Sorry but serves your right

[deadmongrel]

you should have known when you bought DRM tainted video. There is no perpetual access to the data you paid for.In the short term DRM might look harmless but its going to be a pain in the neck for people who actually pay for using it.
Solution: Use your wallet to prove your point. Buy used cds and dvds if you must. Stay away from HDDVD and blueray disks/players. Buy mp3 audio from amazon.com and stop buying DRM stuff.

Re:Sorry but serves your right

[dpilot]

It strikes me that we sit here on /. and say, "Nyah, nyah, no DRM, icky-ick," and in passing realize that we're not in the target market, and any so-called boycotts we attempt to do will be meaningless.

But there is another side to it...

This guy is an early-adopter, and he's just been screwed. The next tier of customers frequently don't jump until they've gotten a warm fuzzy feeling from the early adopters. This guy's friends and acquaintances aren't going to get that feeling, and hold off a bit longer.

Originally one of the scary things about DRM was that most of it was going to be turned off - at first. My sinister presumption was that that would let the early adopters have their day - and make their recommendations. By the time they started turning the DRM on they would hopefully have significant market penetration, and assuming they were careful with their staging of turning it on, they'd likely get away with it.

If this is any sign, that plan hasn't come to pass.

This is Good News.

works as advertised

[osssmkatz]

A Microsoft problem? No. The feature is implemented correctly. If the monitor does not have the authorization chip that the new drivers in Vista are set to check for (thus closing the analog hole), the DRM will not play. Because VGA is older, the content will play on that. It's a feature of Windows Media, that might be fixed if Microsoft does not implement the monitor check in Silverlight which they are switching to. Since they want to support Macs, and Apple isn't that stupid, hopefully they won't be able to.

--Sam

Upgrade to XP

[CritterNYC]

This is a bug that only affects Windows Vista (defective DRM is prevalent). Upgrading to Windows XP will solve the problem.

Re:There are sample videos in the "My Videos" fold

[Anonymous Coward]

This should be moderated as +5 Interesting, not because of DRM-digital anecdote, but because somebody actually got Creative drivers to work!

OOhhhh Look!!

[jon287]

Chickens! Why it seems they've come home to roost!

I always said that as soon as customers started loosing legally purchased media and having real difficulties with brand new hardware that the days or DRM would be over. Could that day be here already?! Happy 2008 all.

Re:I call bullshit...

[mariushm]

He changed the monitors, which caused Vista to invalidate the DRM, much like a Windows Genuine Advantage. Now his Netflix account is invalid and has to revalidate it and for this the application will scan all his licenses and reset all license it finds (which means he would have to contact Amazon and all the other companies and request to have the licenses activated again). Or something like that.

Sounds like an antitrust violation AND fraud

[Ungrounded Lightning]

In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft's DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM.

It will destroy your paid-for content if you have other content from another vendor? Sounds like an antitrust violation AND consumer fraud.

I'd bring this up with the FTC.

And I'd sue Netflix in small claims for everything you've paid so far. B-)

= = = =

Imagine if fifty, just fifty, people a day did that. They might think it's a movement. And that's what it is. The Alice's Restaurant Anti-DRM-masaccree movement. And you can join just by singing it, the next time it comes around on the guitar... B-)

The three R's of Microsoft is now four

[MrKaos]

It used to be the three R's of running windows;

Reboot the machine

Reload the application

Reinstall the Operating system

Now we can add

Revert to a previous version

Vista has given me a whole new view of windows, Oh and it looks like the site is past it's quota. Slashdot strikes again.

article text

[Anonymous Coward]

Even though I'm an HDTV fanatic, it wasn't until this past weekend, that I finally made the jump to an HD monitor. While I don't have HDTV tuners on my Media Center, I do have an HD camcorder and it was important for me to be able to edit my high resolution videos.

After doing a little bit of research, I decided to pick up a SyncMasterTM 226BW from Samsung. Between the new monitor and my ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT video card, the resolution looks absolutely stunning. Even my home movies look fantastic in HDTV. I really couldn't have been happier with the upgrade.

Unfortunately, Hollywood isn't quite as thrilled about my new HD Media Dream Machine and they've decided to punish me by revoking my Watch Now privileges from Netflix.

I first found out about the problem on New Year's Eve, when I went to log into my account. When I tried to launch a streaming movie, I was greeted with an error message asking me to "reset" my DRM. Luckily, Netflix's help page on the topic included a link to a DRM reset utility, but when I went to install the program, I stopped dead in my tracks when I saw this warning.

[img]

The minute I saw"this will potentially remove playback licenses from your computer, including those from companies other than Netflix or Microsoft" I knew better than to hit continue. Before nuking my entire digital library, I decided to call Netflix's technical support, to see if I could get to the bottom of my C00D11B1 error message.

When I called them they confirmed my worst fears. In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft's DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM. This means that I would lose all the movies that I've purchased from Amazon's Unbox, just to troubleshoot the issue.

Technically, there is a way to back up the licenses before doing a DRM reset, but it's a pretty complex process, even by my standards. When I asked Netflix for more details, they referred me to Amazon for assistance.

Perhaps even worse than having to choose between having access to Netflix or giving up my Unbox movies was the realization that my real problems were actually tied to the shiny new monitor that I've already grown fond of.

Netflix's software allows them to look at the video card, cables and the monitor that you are using and when they checked mine out, it was apparently a little too high def to pass their DRM filters.

Because my computer allows me to send an unrestricted HDTV feed to my monitor, Hollywood has decided to revoke my ability to stream 480 resolution video files from Netflix. In order to fix my problem, Netflix recommended that I downgrade to a lower res VGA setup.

As part of their agreement with Hollywood, Netflix uses a program called COPP (Certified Output Protection Protocal). COPP is made by Microsoft and the protocol restricts how you are able to transfer digital files off of your PC. When I ran COPP to identify the error on my machine, it gave me an ominous warning that "the exclusive semaphere is owned by another process."

My Netflix technician told me that he had never heard of this particular error and thought that it was unique to my setup. When I consulted Microsoft, they suggested that I consult the creator of the program. Since Microsoft wrote the COPP software, I wasn't sure who to turn to after that.

The irony in all of this, is that the DRM that Hollywood is so much in love with, is really only harming their paying customers. When you do a DRM reset, it's not your pirated files that get revoked, it's the ones that you already paid for that are at risk. I'm not allowed to watch low res Netflix files, even though I have the capability to download high def torrents? How does this even make sense? It's as if the studios want their digital strategies to fail.

While I understand the need for the studios to protect their content, I believe that these measures g

Re:I'll bite.

[bigstrat2003]

And you're neatly sidestepping the issue altogether. Nice trick, that. The issue is that switching to a "free" (however one defines that, which is a discussion unto itself) OS will not solve the problem at all. All that will happen is you'll have to pirate your videos, which is the same damn solution that you'd have to go to under Windows... so the OS change has netted you no benefit whatsoever with respect to this DRM issue.

Sorry Server Down - Link To Article

[Davis Freeberg]

Sorry everyone /. was a little too powerful for my hosting company and they won't let me up my quota. If anyone knows of any webhosting companies that can handle the /. effect, I'm in the market for a new one. In the meantime, here is a link to another copy of the article in case you would like to read it. If someone can get Commander Taco to update it in the main article, I would appreciate it. Thanks for all the support and I hope that you don't hate me too much for making the mistake of buying Vista and DRM movies. Sometimes you have to experience how crappy DRM is first hand, in order to realize how much value it strips from your content.

Re:Sorry Server Down - Link To Article

[ben there...]

Did you happen to check this first Google result? At least 5 people in that thread got that error, uninstalled "Samsung PC Studio 3" and fixed their C00D11B1 error. Several others uninstalled the latest DivX. A couple others had sound card problems.

In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft's DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. First off, that's not how Windows Media DRM works. The Netflix Reset Microsoft DRM Utility, I'm guessing, just connects to this site and re-individualizes your DRM (aka: gives you a new key). All your other DRM'd videos from Amazon Unbox or elsewhere are encrypted with, and tied to, the key you already have. If you change that key, they won't work anymore. No "sniffing" necessary.

If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM. This means that I would lose all the movies that I've purchased from Amazon's (AMZN) Unbox, just to troubleshoot the issue. Other than making for a good story, losing movies from Amazon Unbox is not really a problem. You can re-download videos you've purchased from Unbox as many times as you want, unlike with iTMS. If your key no longer works, download them again.

Personally, I've backed up all my Unbox purchases by stripping the DRM with FU4WM and burning the resulting files to DVD, to avoid the potential for any real DRM problems in the future. Unlike this one, which isn't a real problem. It's a software/driver conflict combined with poor tech support, and a blogger who didn't give enough details in the post to solve the problem, but who is instead blowing things way out of proportion.

I don't like DRM, and therefore don't like using Unbox or Netflix's online services frequently. But let's not exaggerate. This problem has nothing to do with "Hollywood [not being] quite as thrilled about my new HD Media Dream Machine and they've decided to punish me by revoking my Watch Now privileges from Netflix." You had a conflict of some sort on your machine. Tech support gave you the only tool they know to give everyone to fix it. You could just ignore them and solve it yourself without losing your videos. Or, as I said, just download them again, like you are allowed to do with Unbox.

[shallow & pedantic]

[AP2k]

As knowledgeable as we (the /. community) is I concur, we really IS knowledgible in this sort of stuff.

Re:I'll bite.

[toadlife]

You Free(TM) OS fanboys are all fucking idiots.

The original poster proposed using a Free(TM) OS as a method of fighting DRM.
The next poster correctly pointed out that using a Free(TM) OS has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.
Then you idiots keep railing about how using a Free(TM) OS will somehow solve the DRM problem - completely ignoring (and seemingly ignorant of) the fact that DRM can be implemented in ANY operating system with or without cooperation from the authors of the OS.

The issue is DRM and protected content, not operating systems. You can choose not to purchase and consume protected content weather or not you run a Free(TM) OS or not.

My DRM experience, I hope businesses are watching

[Kris_J]

Here's a quicky timeline of a work DRM experience:

• Organisation acquires vendor's DRM-protected video disc, gets temporary license to try it out.
• Staff member sits on it 'cause she's busy, temp license runs out.
• Second temp license requested, IT manager attempts to get videos playing. Any attempt on the laptop he's current using results in a crash.
• IT manager puts it aside long enough for the second temp license to expire, then hands it to me.
• I don't know any of the above as I try to get it working. Ironically, since I'm on a Vista PC all the Media Player DRM works perfectly, but the license isn't current.
• Call vendor to try and get license sorted out, they refuse to help saying we've already had plenty of time to try it.
• I explain DRM to the involved staff here.
• We contact the vendor to say that since we've never been able to get it working, we don't want it.
• Vendor panics at missed sale, gives us third trial license.
• We get videos playing, finally, on a laptop that can be used for presentations.
• We buy product (sigh).

I should find out if it's still working or if it's fallen over in the few months since I last saw it.

Re:I'll bite.

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm, the issue is DRM content AND operating systems. Vista added all sorts of "features" whose only point is to restrict the way that videos can be played back and make overly restrictive digital rights restrictions easier. DRM "could" be implemented under Linux, but there is not pervasive rights restrictions throught libraries, the kernel, and the X server as there are rights restrictions in Vista through libraries, kernel, and video system. A "protected video path" type setup under Linux would simply not be very possible, and if someone tried it, the source is available so it can be circumvented trivially.

          The primary reason for free software being a good antidote to DRM is that I am voting with my wallet. Buying or staying with XP "instead" of Vista doesn't send Microsoft the message -- they may want you to get Vista, but you are still sending money Microsoft's way. OSX is also a big DRM supporter. So, by not purchasing OSX or Windows it sends the message to Apple & Microsoft that I will not spend money with DRM supporters.

Re:Slashdotted.

[MillionthMonkey]

And he's requested Google to not cache it? That was helpful!

He DID request in his robots.txt for Google to cache it. Unfortunately his robots.txt file got invalidated during a server upgrade and Hollywood revoked his right to allow Google to copy it.

DO NOT use Layeredtech or SAVVIS

[imunfair]

DO NOT buy from Layeredtech or any SAVVIS reseller if you can help it!
I would have recommended them, until they shut off my server because they didn't approve of one of my websites (which wasn't in any way illegal) - and would only turn it back on if I would remove the offending website. Not only the content, the entire site. They wouldn't even let me put an index page up explaining to visitors what had happened to the site!

Read on if you want the long explanation. Proof via saved web pages are links at the end

--

I hosted a forum (think PHPBB type) on my server, among other things. At one point it was a fairly popular hang out for kids on AOL Instant Messenger - and in one thread they were discussing social engineering as a way to obtain screen names. No explicit details, just in general. Eventually I re-purposed the forum and moved these threads to an 'Archive' section in case anyone wanted information at a later date. The last post in the offending thread was July 8, 2005.

On October 5, 2006 - over a year later - I get an email from Layeredtech, saying I have violated the SAVVIS AUP (SAVVIS is their upstream host - Layeredtech is just a reseller basically). AOL had emailed SAVVIS and claimed the thread was hosting confidential AOL information. SAVVIS then incompetently classified it as a "phishing site" and passed it on to Layeredtech. The Layeredtech rep looked at the site and changed the description to "hack site". Now keep in mind this has all happened in the space of less than 3 hours, before they decide to disconnect the server completely from the network until I respond. I notice the site is down/check my email 30 minutes later and see what has happened - asking them to reevaluate and also verify that the takedown request was from AOL and not from a malicious 3rd party.

After a few more back and forth replies I am told that the server will be put back online if I make the entire site resolve to a 404 error - nothing else will suffice. (Remember, the only offending material is one year old thread in an entire forum) I finally agree as I have no other way to get the most recent database backups off the server. At this point I'm thinking that the 404 request is just 'letter of the law' and maybe the rep just has to say that. I make my backups just to be safe, and replace the entire forum with an index page announcing why it was down.

A week later I get an email saying that I must remove this index page and make it resolve to a 404 or they will shut down the server again. At this point I cancel my account with them and move my data elsewhere.

Now, this is just conjecture on my part - but at the time I did some research and found an article about AOL and SAVVIS doing some business together, so it's possible that's why they dealt with it so harshly - but I wouldn't want to risk it, and wouldn't give my business to anyone who handled a matter so entirely incompetently as those two did (Layeredtech and SAVVIS).

Here are the pages from the whole fiasco:

the offending forum thread:
http://www.tsourceweb.com/files/ltserver/post.htm

the entire support ticket exchange with layeredtech:
http://www.tsourceweb.com/files/ltserver/layered.htm

my temporary announcement page:
http://www.tsourceweb.com/files/ltserver/index.html

Re:I'll bite.

[SanityInAnarchy]

completely ignoring (and seemingly ignorant of) the fact that DRM can be implemented in ANY operating system with or without cooperation from the authors of the OS.

That part is not true.

At least on a Free(TM) OS, more Free than Linux currently is, it would not be possible to implement effective DRM, because the user would effectively have control over everything the application has access to. This means that, for instance, you could always run it in a virtual machine, record all traffic in and out of it (including to the pseudo random number generator library), and do a replay attack on it.

That's the more brute-force attack. The fact is, a rootkit should be much easier on Linux. Given the default policy of no root access and the sheer variety of kernels out there, there's simply far less that an app can be sure of about its environment, which makes it much more difficult to tell if that environment is "real" or "trusted". Most games which have been ported to Linux did not bother to port any of the CD-based copy protection, probably because they realized how insanely simple it would be for Linux people to implement an undetectable Daemontools.

With at least the major proprietary OSes, you'll first have to crack the DRM that's built-in to the OS -- convince it that it really is running on bare metal, or convince it to let you do that messing-with-the-IO trick.

So it doesn't completely solve the problem, but I do believe a free system is a lot more hostile, in practice and also in culture, to DRM.

I'm fully aware that Linux itself can have binary kernel modules, at which point, there's really no technological difference. But the cultural difference is important. Anyone switching to Linux is also going to be acutely aware of DRM, partly because things without DRM will work for them, and things with DRM won't (at least for now).

hate to say i told you so...

[Thirdsin]

Bad situation, definitely...
And before I say this and everyone mods me for flamebait, i'm just echoing what I think is right...

STOP BUYING DRM PROTECTED MEDIA. Problem solved. Read a book, peruse Slashdot, talk to your wife... i dunno, but giving the hollywood pigs their chow will not bring about any change.
mod away, sry.

Good

[saladpuncher]

Dear makers of DRM: please keep this up! Please, please, please keep making it harder for consumers to view your stuff. I've got an idea! How about a program that deletes all mp3s and (why the hell not) installs a root kit. I still don't think that goes far enough. You might want to kill all avi file usage too. Of course this only hurts the low tech pirates. You might want to limit streaming to ANY device that hasn't been registered. How about if I decide to take a game to a friend's house to show him how awesome it is? Fuck that! He hasn't paid a license so brick his machine. Pop a new HD-DVD/Blue Ray/ETC into a car stereo? Better make that thing call home before he can hear it. Also maybe make him swipe a card, enter a password and give a retinal scan too. Make him jump through hoops! Hoops that are on FIRE! Maybe then people will dump this tired crap and move to a standard that works for everyone.

State-of-the-art watermarking techniques

[this great guy]

I remember reading 2-3 years ago research articles claiming that state-of-the-art image watermarking techniques were pretty robust against alterations and 100% undetectable even though their algorithms were known. Which makes sense, this is the same principle as in cryptography: the security of the mechanism should not rely on the secrecy of the algorithm itself.

Now I understand that video watermarking techniques is an entirely different domain, but I am surprised by your comment... So are you talking about watermarking of images or videos ?

Re:Why use HDMI?

[monsted]

Close. HDMI is DVI with sound (basically good old SPDIF). DVI supports HDCP (on some devices) and HDCP isn't a requirement on HDMI.

The problem is that some things require HDCP on high quality video signals, thus needing HDCP-enabled DVI or HDMI devices. The same goes for high quality sound, but since there's no protection on SPDIF, you're just out of luck. I believe that Vista will destroy your sound quality if DRM-infested media is played with an SPDIF output.

Not fully digital, but still nice

[glindsey]

This can all be solved by a little device called HDFury. It sits between your display and your DRM enabled device and converts from nasty DRM laden, to beautiful, DRM free signals. Completely digitally. (Unless you get the VGA model) I'm afraid not -- it converts HDMI to an analog RGB signal which is then output to your monitor (or TV/projector with RGB inputs).

In theory, future HDCP content could invalidate whatever key it is using to decrypt the signal; in practice, the makers of the HDFury probably cloned the keys of something extremely popular (for example, a Sony Bravia or Sharp Aquos television), so revoking the key would infuriate thousands of HDTV owners.

The manufacturers of HDFury say that it is a totally legal conversion device, but they're either ignorant, or lying. The specifications for HDCP-protected content state that it is up to the content provider whether analog outputs on the device are enabled. Something tells me they're not exactly honoring what the content provider tells them to do.

(I probably don't have to tell you that even attempting to purchase an HDFury makes you a criminal in the United States thanks to the DMCA, but if you're the sort to buy one I doubt you're very worried about that.)

Drm.

[changa]

Strange game... only winning move is not to play.